利福平
医学
内科学
幽门螺杆菌
阿莫西林
荟萃分析
不利影响
优势比
质子抑制剂泵
胃肠病学
随机对照试验
埃索美拉唑
置信区间
抗生素
外科
克拉霉素
微生物学
生物
作者
Rachel Gingold‐Belfer,Yaron Niv,Zohar Levi,Doron Boltin
摘要
Abstract Background and Aim Due to the increasing resistance of Helicobacter pylori , there is a need for novel antibiotic treatment protocols. We aimed to perform a systematic review and meta‐analysis in order to determine the effectiveness and safety of rifabutin triple therapy for H. pylori infection. Methods We performed a systematic review of prospective clinical trials with a treatment arm consisting of proton pump inhibitor, amoxicillin, and rifabutin and a meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Results Thirty‐three prospective studies including 44 datasets were identified. Meta‐analysis of four RCTs for rescue treatment found no difference between treatment groups (odds ratio [OR] 0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.437–1.791, I 2 = 68.1%, P = 0.733). Only one RCT compared rifabutin therapy with control for first‐line treatment of H. pylori infection (OR 3.78, 95% CI 2.44–5.87, P < 0.0001). Treatment was more likely to be successful in Asian versus non‐Asian populations (81.0% vs 72.4%, P = 0.001) and when daily amoxicillin dose was ≥ 3000 mg or proton pump inhibitor dose was ≥ 80 mg or treatment duration was 14 days (80.6% vs 66.0%, P = 0.0001). The overall event rate for adverse effects was 24.8% (729/2937) (95% CI 0.23–0.26), and the pooled OR for adverse effects in the treatment versus control group was 0.93 (95% CI 0.50–1.75) ( I 2 = 79.76, P = 0.82). Conclusion Evidence for the effectiveness of rifabutin for the first‐line treatment of H. pylori infection in adults is limited, and studies comparing rifabutin with conventional first‐line treatments are lacking.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI